Entry Instance

HTTP 200 OK
Allow: GET, PUT, PATCH, DELETE, HEAD, OPTIONS
Content-Type: application/json
Vary: Accept

{
    "id": 1520517,
    "url": "https://info.mzalendo.com/api/v0.1/hansard/entries/1520517/?format=api",
    "text_counter": 111,
    "type": "speech",
    "speaker_name": "Tharaka, UDA",
    "speaker_title": "Hon. George Murugara",
    "speaker": null,
    "content": "saying that the manenos of law are under the Departmental Committee on Justice and Legal Affairs. Allow me to second the Culture Bill, which has come to the House, so that we can codify the law relating to various cultural practices in the country. This law is of great interest to most of us because our culture has a checkered history. This is especially, after the advent of the white man, who came over with extremely offensive opinions about it. Most of what we used to practise as Africans was declared to be repugnant and offensive to morality. As a result, we were convinced to abandon our culture and assume the white man's culture. Time has come for the country to relook its position as regards culture and heritage. Especially, when it comes to the outright theft of our heritage by people who once told us that our culture was repugnant to the good order of human beings. This is a timely Bill. We should look at it as a House. I encourage every Member to obtain a copy of the Bill, go through it and make arguments in support, so that we can preserve our culture and heritage. We should be able to earn a living from our culture and heritage where possible. I have looked at this Bill and it is extremely good. It begins by trying to define what our culture and heritage is. It also explains what would happen if you breached any provisions of that law and are convicted of those offences. Our culture needs to be managed. Our traditional practices have, sometimes, been showcased during national events or other cultural events. Unfortunately, they are not codified anywhere. A person makes a cultural presentation, he is given a token payment or nothing at all, and the story ends there. We are now coming up with a culture inventory. If someone is caught trying to cheat another person out of their cultural practices, they will be committing an offence under this law and on conviction, they will face a fine. If they default on the fine, they may go to jail or get a fine and a jail term, simultaneously. We are handing over the management of our culture to the National Government because we, sometimes, feel that the county governments may not have the capacity to manage our culture. However, they will play a role in establishing culture databases and identifying areas that will be codified as heritage sites. Part II defines what the National Government and county governments are supposed to do. The requirement is to register and validate registration from time to time. We have been given curious offences. I urge Members to look at Part III, which runs from Clause 20 up to Clause 29. I want to point out a few of the offences which I think are curious. Clause 24 states that: “(24) Any person who intentionally damages or destroys an inventoried cultural property or artifact commits an offence and shall, on conviction, be liable to imprisonment for life. Hon. Members, you have to look at this because it may be disproportionate that you be jailed for life if you ever commit any of the offences under Clause 24. The discretion of the court is taken away. We may just have to relook at it when we go to the Committee of the whole House. Clause 25 is also interesting. It states: “25. A person who is found in possession of cultural property to which he or she has no lawful right commits an offence”. Again, we have to define what it means “to be in possession” because some cultural properties are inherited. They are inborn with the person. Therefore, you may not know when to license that property or not. One may be convicted of an offence which we know in law as"
}